Click on the following links. Please note these will open in a new window.

Liu, X (2008). Research on the NA and Academic Integrity. Critique of Anthropology, 28 (3), 297-320.

Summary: Through the critique of the theoretical claims and research approaches of Cai Hua, a French-trained Chinese anthropologist, this article discusses issues regarding studies of the Na and academic integrity in China. It questions the legitimacy of Cai's scholarly work, criticizes his plagiarism in a broader context of China's struggle against academic fraud and points out that in order to build a healthy and prosperous academic environment, scholars must subject themselves to the standards of academic integrity.

Questions to consider:

1. Why is China especially prone to academic fraud?
    
2. How can more rigorous academic standards reduce academic fraud in China?
    
3. How does Cai’s plagiarism reflect broader issues regarding academic ethics in China?
    

Perry, B. (2010). Exploring academic misconduct: Some insights into student behavior, Active Learning in Higher Education, 11(2), 97-108. 

Summary: Academic research and newspaper stories suggest that academic misconduct, including plagiarism, is on the increase. This apparent increase coupled with new internet enterprises selling ‘pass’ papers and customized research are worrying trends. Academic misconduct is deeply harmful in a number of ways by devaluing awards, frustrating academics and demotivating ‘honest’ students. Despite the heightened attention given to it, the entire subject seems to be clouded in uncertainty, not least what students themselves think. This article addresses student attitudes and understandings of academic misconduct. Findings from a study conducted within a large business school indicated that teaching on plagiarism was ineffective and there were many misunderstandings, which had coincided with high levels of unintentional plagiarism, bogus referencing and collusion. First-year students in particular experienced difficulties. As part of this article a theoretical framework for understanding student behaviour is proposed which may suggest various improved learning and teaching strategies.

Questions to consider:

1. How does the author define plagiarism?
    
2. What contributes to students’ confusion about the definition of plagiarism?
    
3. What are the different typologies of cheaters outlined in the article?
    
4. What can be done to prevent the different types of plagiarism on college campuses?